News US fighter jet slams into home

[tblaxland]

A United States F-18 fighter jet has crashed into a residential neighbourhood in California, destroying a house, but there are no immediate reports of injuries, aviation and military officials said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/09/2441076.htm

 

[Hielor]

AP reports 2 deaths on the ground and that the pilot ejected safely. I've seen no mention of the second person in the plane, as the F/A-18D is a two-seat variant.

http://news.aol.com/article/military-jet-crashes-into-residential/271591

 

[Urwumpe]

AP reports 2 deaths on the ground and that the pilot ejected safely. I've seen no mention of the second person in the plane, as the F/A-18D is a two-seat variant.

http://news.aol.com/article/military-jet-crashes-into-residential/271591

Are you sure it is a D hornet and not a C or E hornet? The article says so, but it is impossible for the pilot to eject and the backseater not - the back seater has even to eject microseconds earlier.

 

[FordPrefect]

...but it is impossible for the pilot to eject and the backseater not - the back seater has even to eject microseconds earlier.

Unless it was flown by one pilot only, which happens regularly, even with the D and F models, I think.

*Empty backseat... what a waste. Would love to have a ride on one of those*

 

[tblaxland]

Are you sure it is a D hornet and not a C or E hornet? The article says so, but it is impossible for the pilot to eject and the backseater not - the back seater has even to eject microseconds earlier.

From the article I linked:

A Marine Corps spokesman meanwhile, has confirmed the plane was carrying two crew but their fate was not immediately known.

 

[ar81]

With all those houses that are being reposessed by banks, I wonder if this was one of them...
I would like that to be the case, so no one is hurt.

 

[FordPrefect]

This is the airframe involved:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA---Marines/McDonnell-Douglas-F-A-18D/1283040/L/

It looks like two people on the ground are missing.


**

 

[Quick_Nick]

"He was in his kitchen when he heard two loud explosions and looked outside, then heard a larger blast."
"Ben Dishman, 55, said he heard what sounded like "a loud gunshot" followed by an explosion."

So I'm guessing it was past Mach 1 when it crashed. hmy:
At least everything seems to be under control now, with only two homes lost as far as I know.

 

[Hielor]

"He was in his kitchen when he heard two loud explosions and looked outside, then heard a larger blast."
"Ben Dishman, 55, said he heard what sounded like "a loud gunshot" followed by an explosion."

So I'm guessing it was past Mach 1 when it crashed. hmy:

Your guess would be absolutely wrong. Here's why:
-The jet was coming in for a landing. You don't land at supersonic speeds.
-You're not supposed to go supersonic over the continental US anyway.

The "gunshot" was probably just the sound of it smashing through something.

 

[Epsilon]

Your guess would be absolutely wrong. Here's why:
-The jet was coming in for a landing. You don't land at supersonic speeds.
-You're not supposed to go supersonic over the continental US anyway.

Never stopped those at Cherry Point. *mutters*
And then the Harrier pilots that buzzed the barracks at 7am Sunday morning.

So glad I don't live/work on/near an airbase anymore.

 

[Urwumpe]

This happened exactly 20 years after the Remscheid crash, where a A-10 Thunderbolt crashed into an apartment block in dense fog... the leader of the group decided to fly by VFR rules, instead of IFR...

 

[Kyle]

-The jet was coming in for a landing. You don't land at supersonic speeds.

Dang so thats why I keep on crashing the Delta Glider IV,


This whole incident is very sad, and its even worse because my old house was 8 blocks away from the crash.

 

[Andy44]

You don't land at supersonic speeds.

Obviously you've never flown with me. White knuckles, anyone?

 

[willy88]

But why did it crash?

 

[cdhutch]

Here's the latest local news report: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20081209-1634-bn09jetdown4.html

Pilot was a student undergoing carrier qualifications; single aircrew in a 2-seat trainer that the F-18 training squadron flies at Miramar.

Speculation: Based upon the address given in other articles, his crash site approximately 2 miles short Runway 6 along the extended centerline would indicate he was doing a straight in approach in accordance with an aircraft experiencing malfunctions. Dual engine failures as indicated in the article tend to be the result of fuel starvation--either no gas left or gas trapped in tanks and not accessible by engines.

 

[Quick_Nick]

Best wishes and condolences to Yoon and other family/friends.

 

[tblaxland]

Apologies for the thread bump, but there is some fresh news.

The pilot of a US military jet that crashed in California last year, killing four people, opted to fly over populated areas rather than make an emergency landing approach over water, air traffic control tapes have revealed.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/04/2507115.htm?section=justin

 

[Pablo]

So I'm guessing it was past Mach 1 when it crashed.

Normally you would be limited by ICAO regulations to fly at no more than 250 Kts lower than 10.000 ft. Only under very special circumstances pilots are allowed to fly at higher speeds below that altitude - for example, if their planes do have higher stall speeds or experience some condition that would make them difficult or inefficient to control at low speeds, like in the case of the "Lifting bodies" tested by NASA as part of the space shuttle development. I don't know exactly what the stall speeds of the various types of F-18 are, but considering that some variants are used as naval aircraft they must be lower than that. Plus, if the plane was flying low over populated areas it is almost certain that it wouldn't pass that speed limit on purpose unless it was sent on a real-life interception misssion.

An aircraft falling from the ski uncontrollably might just surpass the speed of sound, but it would need altitude to gain it. About 200 km from my home a DC-9 once crashed vertically at Mach 1,1 falling from about 30,000 ft. Nobody onboard survived; the engines were buried about 10m below ground level.

I guess that it would be nice to take such regulations and IFR rules into Orbiter atmospheric sim flights, as well as standard departure, arrival and approach procedures like those used by regular aircraft - or develop new ones.

 

[Hielor]

Normally you would be limited by ICAO regulations to fly at no more than 250 Kts lower than 10.000 ft. Only under very special circumstances pilots are allowed to fly at higher speeds below that altitude - for example, if their planes do have higher stall speeds or experience some condition that would make them difficult or inefficient to control at low speeds, like in the case of the "Lifting bodies" tested by NASA as part of the space shuttle development. I don't know exactly what the stall speeds of the various types of F-18 are, but considering that some variants are used as naval aircraft they must be lower than that. Plus, if the plane was flying low over populated areas it is almost certain that it wouldn't pass that speed limit on purpose unless it was sent on a real-life interception misssion.

An aircraft falling from the ski uncontrollably might just surpass the speed of sound, but it would need altitude to gain it. About 200 km from my home a DC-9 once crashed vertically at Mach 1,1 falling from about 30,000 ft. Nobody onboard survived; the engines were buried about 10m below ground level.

If you would read the thread prior to replying, you would see that it was already established that he was not above mach 1.

I guess that it would be nice to take such regulations and IFR rules into Orbiter atmospheric sim flights, as well as standard departure, arrival and approach procedures like those used by regular aircraft - or develop new ones.

That would be excellent.

 

[Ark]

I guess that it would be nice to take such regulations and IFR rules into Orbiter atmospheric sim flights, as well as standard departure, arrival and approach procedures like those used by regular aircraft - or develop new ones.

Ah, but the question is: What would it do to me for breaking them?